ArticleBMJ public health2024
How much does government's short-term response matter for explaining cross-country variation in COVID-19 infection outcomes? A regression-based relative importance analysis of 84 countries.
Article in BMJ public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Challenges faced by health policymakers responding to COVID-19 in remote communities in Northwest Territories, Canada.Health promotion international · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We study the predetermined characteristics of countries in addition to their government non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to shed light on the correlates of the variation in COVID-19 infection outcomes across countries. Methods and analysis: We conduct a systematic investigation of the validity of government responses in 84 countries by gradually adding the predetermined cultural, natural and socioeconomic factors of each country using a fixed-effect model and daily panel data. A relative importance analysis is conducted to isolate the contribution of each variable to the R Results: Government NPIs are effective in containing the virus spread and explain approximately 9% of the variations in the pandemic outcomes. COVID-19 is more prevalent in countries that are more individual-oriented or with a higher gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, while a country's government expenditure on health as a proportion of GDP and median age are negatively associated with the infection outcome. The SARS-CoV-2 lifecycle and the impacts of other unobserved factors together explain more than half of the variation in the prevalence of COVID-19 across countries. The degree of individualism explains 9.30% of the variation, and the explanatory power of the other socioeconomic factors is less than 4% each. Conclusion: The COVID-19 infection outcomes are correlated with multivariate factors, ranging from state NPIs, culture-influenced human behaviours, geographical conditions and socioeconomic conditions. As expected, the stronger or faster are the government responses, the lower is the level of infections. In the meantime, many other factors underpin a major part of the variation in the control of COVID-19. As such, from a scientific perspective, it is important that country-specific conditions are taken into account when evaluating the impact of NPIs in order to conduct more cost-effective policy interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.